4 ms·

Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc are all closed source and much larger (by line count) than the kernel and BSD stuff. You can even throw WebKit and LLV

Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc are all closed source and much larger (by line count) than the kernel and BSD stuff. You can even throw WebKit and LLVM (which are humongous) in the mix and it won't change the balance. But since I can't link to them and neither can you, we're just going to keep saying the other one is wrong in a web forum.

Maursault 4y ago
And that is expected, because graphics takes up a lot of space, so this comparison is not intellectually honest. But I'd like to see you try running just the "Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc" without the kernel and BSD userland. Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works.
- babylonunited 4y ago
  > But I'd like to see you try running just the "Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc" without the kernel and BSD userland That's the point we can't because they are binaries (with strict EULA at that) but make it open source I can guarantee they will be ported to Linux within a year :D > Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works. entirely OSS operating system that lacked hardware supports to be useful, what is the point over something like Linux. Even FreeBSD supports more hardware.
- tambourine_man 4y ago
  >because graphics takes up a lot of space, so this comparison is not intellectually honest I've written “by line count”. It's more code, lots of it, not binary size. >Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works. You're discussing merits, I've been arguing about an absolute value: lines of code. But if you want to discuss merit, here's another objective data: Darwin has been open source for 20 years. No one runs it. Because all the value is at the top layers and lower closed source ones. See the trouble folks at Asahi Linux are going through to reverse engineer the M1's GPU graphic driver.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Maursault 4y ago

And that is expected, because graphics takes up a lot of space, so this comparison is not intellectually honest. But I'd like to see you try running just the "Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc" without the kernel and BSD userland. Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works.

babylonunited 4y ago
> But I'd like to see you try running just the "Cocoa/UIKit, Quartz, Core*, drivers, etc" without the kernel and BSD userland That's the point we can't because they are binaries (with strict EULA at that) but make it open source I can guarantee they will be ported to Linux within a year :D > Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works. entirely OSS operating system that lacked hardware supports to be useful, what is the point over something like Linux. Even FreeBSD supports more hardware.
tambourine_man 4y ago
>because graphics takes up a lot of space, so this comparison is not intellectually honest I've written “by line count”. It's more code, lots of it, not binary size. >Without the GUI, we still have an operating system that is entirely OSS. With only the GUI, we have nothing that works. You're discussing merits, I've been arguing about an absolute value: lines of code. But if you want to discuss merit, here's another objective data: Darwin has been open source for 20 years. No one runs it. Because all the value is at the top layers and lower closed source ones. See the trouble folks at Asahi Linux are going through to reverse engineer the M1's GPU graphic driver.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]